Introduction:

​

         I still remember the first time the algorithm ensnared me. After hours of late-night doom-scrolling and feeling inferior to those who had achieved pipe dreams, the ad for a productivity balm– a scented essential-oil rub sold as a substitute for focus, and now an obvious grift– breached my usual skepticism toward advertisements. It felt, after all, like the Internet was reading my mind– providing me just what I needed; in reality, it was curating my vulnerabilities so I was another perfect customer to sell to.​

​

         I am not alone in this consumption war, where agency is a mirage carefully maintained by ‘choice architects’ and subterfuge. Rather, the systemic targeting of uninformed consumers via misleading advertising is a pandemic afflicting billions of consumers around the globe, where companies capitalize on the insecurities and knowledge gaps of laypeople. This practice not only ignores the broader consequences that follow suit for society– such as financial losses, physical harm, mental harm, and eroded consumer trust– but it also violates the fundamental human right to autonomy, and must therefore be eradicated.

​

         One of the most tangible harms uninformed consumers face is the financial and temporal loss that follows from being targeted by false advertising; consumers lose money when they pay more than a product is worth, fall prey to bait-and-switch tactics, incur hidden fees and costs, etc. (Camphouse, 2025). Credit and subscription service providers are great examples of bad-faith actors that exploit customers. For instance, a credit card company may attract customers by offering extremely low interest rates and numerous reward points, while including in fine print that these conditions only apply for the first month. Similarly, subscription service providers such as streaming platforms are quick to offer discounted prices to entice customers to purchase their product, while omitting the surcharges and difficult cancellation processes that follow afterward. Not only do these tactics cause considerable fiscal strain for customers, but they also siphon time– a precious commodity that must now be spent on following up with multiple parties, recovering losses, and searching for better products. This means that, alongside individual financial victims, the economy as a whole also suffers (due to reduced consumer spending).

​

         Beyond financial losses, misleading advertising also inflicts profound physiological and psychological harm on consumers (CD Law, 2024). Skincare products exemplify such tactics; using unblemished models, makeup, lighting, Photoshop, etc., skincare advertisements deceptively promise customers an unattainable aesthetic ideal– despite the actual products being far from functional. As a result, when consumers buy these meretricious products and fail to look like the perfect models advertised, they begin doubting themselves and the body they have. This can cause self-esteem and body image issues, as individuals struggle to reconcile perceptions of themselves with the fabricated beauty standards they are inundated with. This is not just a trivial issue either: a 2021 government report reveals that “a shocking 61% of adults and 66% of children feel negatively about their body image” (King, 2021). For women, this problem is much worse, as the beauty industry tends to target as well as pressure them more with unreasonably high body image standards. Thus, consumers– especially women– suffer mental harm through body image, self-esteem, and depressive issues that are caused by falsely advertising to uninformed customers. In some cases, this mental harm can turn physically dangerous as well, such as when victims of such deceptive targeting end up undergoing risky surgeries, develop eating disorders, engage in self-destructive behaviors, and/or more. The effects of deceptive advertising on consumer health– pernicious and pervasive– therefore further underscores why such practices are incredibly unethical.

​

         Despite the several adverse effects caused by dishonest advertising, proponents of such practices fall back on the doctrine of caveat emptor: let the buyer beware. Essentially, they argue that everyone knows advertising is inherently hyperbolic and that the burden of skepticism lies with the consumer, not the creator. Yet not only does such a viewpoint fail to acknowledge the vast information asymmetry between modern seller and buyer– making “buyer beware” a fundamentally impossible standard– it also overlooks the deep psychological impact modern advertising imposes on individuals subconsciously regardless of conscious thoughts. After all, while 70% of consumers claim they would boycott brands engaged in false advertising, approximately 50% of consumers also “acknowledge being influenced by misleading or false advertising” (7SearchPPC, 2024). Considering that the actual percentages are likely higher due to the ‘third-person effect’, we can see how advertising– leveraging powerful tools like emotional and behavioral triggers, FOMO-inducing (fear of missing out) social endorsements, repetition, persuasive messaging, etc.– manipulates consumer agency subconsciously to suit corporate desires and results in the previously noted harmful effects (Bharti, 2024). Still, supporters of deceptive advertising claim that the economic advantages offered to consumers outweigh the disadvantages– ignoring the underlying flaws of such a claim. Though targeting uninformed consumers may initially expand companies’ audience reach and customer bases, in turn boosting the economy, the eventual discovery of product flaws leads to consumer harm and growing cynicism, ultimately damaging brand loyalty and economic activity (CD Law, 2024). Thus, despite specious ideas about deceptive advertising suggesting otherwise, targeting and misleading uninformed customers does indeed lead to harm.

​​​

Conclusion:

 

         The productivity balm I purchased has dried up long since, but the machinery that sold it to me has only grown more precise. I empathize, therefore, with those who– ensnared by deceitful, opaque advertising– unfortunately endure financial losses, psychological suffering, physical danger, eroded consumer trust, and many more serious perils. It has been established repeatedly that deceptive advertising does not provide any substantive utility due to the societal, business, and economic harms that ensue; it is thus imperative to dismantle such predatory practices, rather than blaming consumers– who are manipulated subconsciously through chicanery. By identifying, acknowledging, protesting against, and mitigating deceptive advertising campaigns, we can ensure such unethical systems are transfigured into a marketplace and world where you and your loved ones can exist with genuine agency and peace of mind overall.